What is Your Definition For “Fun To Drive”?

[Sam Dinkar]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

I agree with the Swift part. At present the best budget petrol engines are the Brio's 1.2, the i20's 1.2 Kappa, and the Swift's 1.2 K Series while the most fun iteration of the 1.3 Multijet is (was) in the old Swift....past 2000 rpm and BANG ! The Old Getz CRDi also has a fun engine. And in petrol cars who can forget the Old Honda City 1.5 - both non VTEC and VTEC versions. Fantastic handlers and brilliant engines. And ohhh that sound after 4000 rpm ! The Punto 1.4 is also quite entertaining and has good handling. The engine revs freely and sounds classy at higher rpms !

 

[cooldhaya]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Yes Brio , Swift and Jazz has great engines. I prefer the 1.2L engine in i10 more than i20. Getz CRDI had a great engine but again not a good handlers , Hyundai's have never been good handlers. I have the same engine in my Verna CRDI and i know it's potential. OHC was maybe good at that time but now against the modern engines they will be found wanting more power.


The only cars which have a nice balance between handling and performance are Swift , Fiesta 1.6L and Rapid TDI under 10lakhs. Maybe Polo 1.6L and Punto 1.4L engines are good too. City is good till good speeds but at extreme high speeds it's not very good. Again this can be countered saying we are not going to race in the streets but still it will be good , atleast i prefer cars which are composed at high speeds.

 

[P3T3R]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

I'd say both.

Swift belongs to the first category? No way.

My +1 to both of you.

Even with those pencil tyres, it is a great handler and at 160 kph, it was pretty stable too.

Even with better tyres I don't think it will be stable i.e. if it manages to reach 160 in the first place.

For me, a fun to drive car should be free revving, chassis and suspension should be stiff enough to support handling and stability and the steering should be light (shorter radius is better) as well.

Your definition is correct except for the steering. A light steering is not very good. That's why hydraulic steering is preferred to electric.

I think from what you have mentioned, the first category belongs to Indian and Korean cars, american cars(Chevy) to some extent. European cars fit the second category quite well, but in both Linea and Vento I never felt potholes filtering into the cabin and there was only a muffled thud(in extreme cases). Japanese cars will have characteristics of both the categories.

Korean cars (Hyundai) are the worst handlers. European are the best. The 1.6 versions of the European cars are the best in both categories. Japanese cars are responsive due to their light weight. Their handling is better than the Koreans but not as good as the Europeans. BTW the Chevy's are more Korean than American.

What's the use of power if you cant control it?
Like someone said, with great power comes great responsibility. So, I choose 'Amazing Handling'.

That sum it up perfectly.

 

[Rightnow]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

@ Right Now Yes Polo is a good handler but still i would have liked it if it performed better.

Sorry for an OT reply. This one goes to all on the forum- being a rookie, may I know in brief to what does 'performance' refer to in cars, so that I may agree or disagree with with cooldhaya's above statement.

 

[Sam Dinkar]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Korean cars (Hyundai) are the worst handlers. European are the best. The 1.6 versions of the European cars are the best in both categories. Japanese cars are responsive due to their light weight. Their handling is better than the Koreans but not as good as the Europeans. BTW the Chevy's are more Korean than American.

Couldn't agree more. You have stolen words from my mouth. Every sentence is perfect. I wish I could give you multiple reputation points for this but I guess you'll have to settle for a single one. So here it comes

 

[cooldhaya]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Sorry for an OT reply. This one goes to all on the forum- being a rookie, may I know in brief to what does 'performance' refer to in cars, so that I may agree or disagree with with cooldhaya's above statement.

Performance means the torque and the power output of the engine. The engine should be free revving. In simple words it should hit the 100kmph mark real quick. Polo is no slouch but it's not quick either.

 

[Rightnow]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Performance means the torque and the power output of the engine. The engine should be free revving. In simple words it should hit the 100kmph mark real quick. Polo is no slouch but it's not quick either.

Well then I must agree that POLO's performance could be inferior to others. At least this is what revealed by numbers on paper.
Nevertheless, I am enjoying this discussion on 'idea of fun to drive' and having fun driving the POLO.

 

[cooldhaya]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Polo is indeed one fun to drive to car. I like its mature suspension setup and high speed handling. I like the way the steering weighs up at high speeds. Performance could have been better but no car is perfect , each car has it's own defects.

 

[autosafari]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

After seeing various posts here I feel that there is a confusion amoung people between various terms like Handling, Ride Quality, Performance, Engine response, Body roll, cornering etc.

Since I am not an expert, request fellow members like Raj, Sam Dinakar, Vibour, TSIVipul and others to explain these terms properly here or in a seperate thread for the sake of all.

It will serve as a reference for all of us and other visitors to this site.

There were several posts in various threads where people talk about handling and ride quality as if they are one and the same.

 

[Nuvo]

Re: What is your definition for Fun to drive?

Ideally it is the combination of both, but if I have to pick only one then it should be the latter.

1st option reminds me to 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner' by Samuel Taylor Coleridge:

"Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink."

(There is enough power in the engine, but still I can't floor the pedal.)

 

[cooldhaya]

I am no expert again but i will try to explain. Handling and ride quality are always at opposite ends. If you want a good handling then you lose out on ride quality. If you want a good comfortable car then you have to compromise on handling.


Handling- Basically it is how the car responds to your steering inputs. The steering feels well weighted and responsive , offers feedback and the car goes where you point it to go to.

Ride quality- This deals with the suspension. As i said before if you want a comfortable car with a soft suspension setup then you will miss the handling. If you want a good handling car then you will have to compromise on the comfort. Good handling cars will have stiff suspension setups and hence the ride quality will be harsh at low speeds.


Performance and engine response- I think these can be directly related. A free revving responsive engine will be a good performer. Of course it depends on various other factors like kerb weight , power to weight ratio etc

Body roll and cornering- I think these can be related again. A good handling car will be a corner craver with minimum body roll. You will feel confident to push the car even further. In softly sprung cars the tail of the car tries to move out , body roll will be evident and you wont feel confident to push the car further.

 

[Marun]

Re: What is Your Definition For “Fun To Drive”?

Whoa, I would select both options. I would say responsive engine and powerful hadling comprises fun to drive factor.

 

[type-r]

i would select both options too. Civic provides with both of it so i am satisfied in both areas. haha

 

[cooldhaya]

Civic thanks to its low slung aerodynamic design , it's handling is decent enough. But i can bet it can never match the likes of Laura and Jetta.


@ Marun You are lucky to own one such car , enjoy!

 

[Nuvo]

Cooldhaya is spot on.

On average, European cars are possess better handling characteristics as compared to Japanese & Koreans cars.

There are exception though : e.g. Handling of Swift is better than Polo.